This Could Be a Long Stressful Winter

The winter of 2014/2015 may well be one of the most stress filled winters in recent memories, equaling and possibly surpassing the oil crisis winters of 1973-1974, and 1976-1977, 1979-1980. In those winters, many with modest to low incomes wondered if they would have oil to heat their homes, and gas to drive their cars as well as the anxiety the affordability of heating oil and gasoline. Those winters were years of significant stress across America.

 

The winter of 2001-2002 was also a winter of increased stress. Experiencing terrorism on its own soil, Americans were under stress that winter wondering not if another attack would take place but when and how it would strike. While many nations in Central America, Africa, Europe, the Middle East and Far East had experienced and long adjusted to such events, for Americans the 9-11 attacks was a new experience which created stress across the nation. Added to that stress was the stress that the nation was quickly moving to war with its people’s crying out for amends and its aging leaders voting to sacrifice the lives of the nation’s youth.

 

The winter of 2014-2015 has the potential to well surpass the stress and fears experienced during those four winters. There is no oil crisis looming for heating oil and gasoline are not only in good supply but their prices are dropping. The cause of the stress are the common flu and cold. We normally handle our own and the colds and flu of others with little concern, but there is evidence all around us that this winter may well be different. A person with a slight fever or who vomits would not give us much concern, but this year our irrational nature will wonder if the person has Ebola and that we will catch Ebola too. That fear will bring stress to many across the nation, and if they later have the flu many will become alarmed. 

 

This week a person at a community college in the Shenandoah Valley had a fever and vomited in a bathroom. Immediately he was identified as an Ebola suspect, quarantined, the men’s bathroom in which he was ill was sealed and quarantined. Then those who had likely were in contact with him were identified and put on a list.  In Charlottesville a feverish woman was also viewed as an Ebola suspect, treated as if she had the decease and tested. There was no evidence that either person had traveled in the past months to Africa or had been in contact with anyone who had or with any current Ebola victim in the US or Europe. Yet, around both individuals people reacted and treated them as if they had Ebola.  Both had a common illness. An overreaction? Most definitely.

 

If we are overreacting to these two individuals, what are we headed for as the flu season hits? Are our fears going to drive us to avoid people with slight flu symptoms and colds, force them to go home and not return until they are well? Are parents going to rushing a child with a fever to the emergency room with a fear that their child has Ebola? Are we months away from thousands of people around us refusing to go to church, parties, sports events and other group gatherings, and flying or traveling on mass transit, all because they fear of being exposed to Ebola?


Are the fears realistic? Not from what I understand of the decease but what can I expect when the press hypes the story and how it covers the story by airing unfounded statements. Was is unfortunate are states made by a growing number of politicians and political operatives who during this campaign season talk of Ebola in irrational uninformed manners and speak as if within months all across the nations many thousands will be fighting for their lives. (The comments made by their politicians and political operatives again reminding me that for too many politicians it is all about the election and the power, not about statesmanship and leadership.)

 

While humanity can be so rational, let's also remember that we can become so illogical too if we don't stop, take a deep breath and think thoughtfully about things.  As for me, I'm going to treat your cold and flu symptoms, and mine to, as just that. 


I fear that this could be a long winter people around us a state of higher than normal stress.      

Societal Trends

Societal trends over two to four decades can be telling in helping one to understand significant shifts that are taking place. Since 1980 the average personal income in the United States has increased from $24,079 to $40,454, adjusted for inflation. How does that 168% increase compare to other major expenses.

Average gasoline prices have increased from $1.25 to 2.85, at 228% in real dollar terms. While the number of miles driven a year have increased by about 22%, with more efficient engines the amount spend on gasoline when inflation is taken into account has increased only 12%, from $2,015 to 2,269.

First class stamp has increased 193% from 0.15 to 0.44, This increase does not take into account inflation.

Milk has increased from $2.16 per gallon to 3.29, a 52% increase.

The cost of the average new home has risen from $76,400 to $268,800, 251% in real dollar terms. Primarily due to more expensive land, much larger and more well appointed homes, the increase is new home prices has been a greater rate than income increase. When inflation is taken into account, the increase drops below 160%.

Over the last thirty years the amount spent on health care on a per capita basis, and adjusted for inflation, has increased 202%, again at a much higher rate than income. Health care is consuming more and more a person’s budget from 1980 when it consumed about 7.5% of the average person’s income. Today health care consumes almost 14% of a person’s income…and with more than three times the rate of people who uninsured than ever before. An aging population is a factor but it and lawsuits are not as significant a factor as the citizenry believes. The major factor is a growing profit return at all levels.

Suppliers of equipment and medicine profit share on a per dollar of sale prices has increased dramatically. In 1980 most major health care insurance plans and hospitals were run by nonprofits companies who had 3.5 to 5.5% rate of return whereas today the insurance and hospital market is dominated by profit firms who have pushed the rate of return to 18 to 20%. In 1980, 95% of insurance premiums went out to providers whereas today that has dropped to 82 to 80%. This does not take into account that for profit hospitals are retaining a greater share of each payment they receive. Further it does not account for fewer benefits being provided and with co-pays that are rising three to fivefold. Matters are not expected to improve for the better as companies seek to increase the rate of return to 78%.

Healthcare is and will continue to be one of America's greatest challenges, and will become even more so over the coming years. Significant changes are not likely to happen until the system starts to crash. Hopefully it will not take the type of protests and marches that took place during the Viet Nam error or at the level we have just witnessed in Egypt.

Healthcare Unconstitutional

On of the arguments being made against the American health care reform is that it is an unconstitutional act by the Federal Government. It is argued that the Constitution does not explicitly grant the Federal Government authority over health care. It is true that the Constitution does not give the Federal Government authority over health care just as it does not give the Federal Government authority over a host of matters such as the transportation and telecommunication system or over employment and safety practices.

Hence, federal authority is non-existent to regulate regarding mine safety changes that have literally saved hundreds of lives a year, pollution of the water and air, the air transportation system and funding of roads. It also means that the federal government has overstepped its authority to set mandatory standards regarding automobile safety. I for one would not travel by air or even feel comfortable driving my vehicles above 30 mph without the assurance of Federal regulations and processes from air traffic control, aircraft maintenance, and safe automobiles.

We must remember that there is a distinction between that which is prohibited versus that which is not explicitly addressed. Involvement and regulation of health care is not prohibited the Constitution.

Advocates who argue that health care reform by the Federal Government is unconstitutional are by extension arguing against the Federal Government’s involvement legislating regarding the airwaves and Internet content. Many of these same advocates are calling for the Feds to put in place regulations to put further limits upon things such as pornography. Many of those who are using the unconstitutional argument also call upon the same government to outlaw abortions. If we accepted their unconstitutional argument then they are calling upon the government to do an unconstitutional act, albeit on a different issue, as the Constitution is silent on the pro-life vs pro-choice/abortion debate.

We must remember that the Constitution was penned in one age and in what the authors could envision happening in the future. No one has advocated that the authors of the Constitution were prophets or clairvoyants who foresaw a society far beyond their own. They could not foresee the abortion debate. Abortion was rare and very dangerous in the 18th century, so much so that it was known only to a small handful of people. They saw the world within the national and international political realities of the day and the technology that they could envision of the horizon. They knew of health care, but it was a crude undeveloped system. Hospitals were rare. People lived and died in their homes using home remedies. They did not foresee the modern transportation and telecommunication processes.

That said, they did understand that society and the world evolves. Hence, they empowered a process that encouraged debated and a process of designing laws and regulations to address new challenges. They designed a government that is called to be flexible and creative in addressing modern issues based upon the founding principles.

One of the other arguments that some grasp to argue against the current legislation is that it has passed because of add ons that were done to secure a person's votes. The American political system is not a Parliamentary system where legislation is focused and rarely includes special riders. From the beginning the American system is about trading of favors whereby one member of Congress will support another in return for his/her support for their proposals or for a rider to be included. Hence in the United States to gain a vote it is it not uncommon for a rider to a transportation bill to have a special grant for a company or public work in a particular district. What happened in getting the 60 Senate votes to prohibit a filibuster is such a common event that rare is a bill passed that does not have several riders, a good number of which have little to do with the particular bill.